What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

College Football 2022: “Here’s a twenty, bury two.”

Status
Not open for further replies.
Or we could have the old bowl system. That would be dandy.

Fiesta Bowl: #11 Kansas State vs #4 Ohio State (1 ET, NBC)
Rose Bowl: #2 Michigan vs #7 Utah (4:30 ET, NBC)
Orange Bowl: #3 TCU vs #10 Clemson (8 ET, NBC)
Sugar Bowl: #1 Georgia vs #9 Penn State (8:30 ET, ABC)
All games Monday, January 2nd (to avoid NFL playoffs)
 
Last edited:
MichVandal said:
What other two would you choose? Seems that the alternatives lost more games when it really counted. Like USC.
Click to expand...

The problem is, Ohio State gained an advantage by getting blown out by Michigan and thus not having to play an extra game.

I know, win the game, and USC would be in. And I'm okay with that retort. It just seems a bit odd that OSU gained by losing.
 
Russell Jaslow said:
The problem is, Ohio State gained an advantage by getting blown out by Michigan and thus not having to play an extra game.

I know, win the game, and USC would be in. And I'm okay with that retort. It just seems a bit odd that OSU gained by losing.
Click to expand...

They gained cause they only lost once. If USC had lost only once and it was the same situation as TCU they probably would have been obligated to put them in.
 
The committee may shift reasons every week on a why a team is in a certain spot above another, but they have been consistent with how they select the playoff.

1) A conference champ with 0-1 losses will make it over a team with 0-1 losses without a conference championship.
2) A 0-1 loss team will make it over a 2 loss team, regardless of championship status

Of course the above only applies to P5 schools.
 
Spartanforlife4 said:
The committee may shift reasons every week on a why a team is in a certain spot above another, but they have been consistent with how they select the playoff.

1) A conference champ with 0-1 losses will make it over a team with 0-1 losses without a conference championship.
2) A 0-1 loss team will make it over a 2 loss team, regardless of championship status

Of course the above only applies to P5 schools.
Click to expand...

All true. Not sure I agree with them, but they're pretty consistently awful.
 
It also didn't help USC losing twice to Utah. It is a lot harder to make the argument you're one of the top 4 teams who should play to be named the best team when you lost twice to someone. At least TCU split the season series with KSU, so you could argue they might win a rubber match.
 
Russell Jaslow said:
The problem is, Ohio State gained an advantage by getting blown out by Michigan and thus not having to play an extra game.

I know, win the game, and USC would be in. And I'm okay with that retort. It just seems a bit odd that OSU gained by losing.
Click to expand...

Without firm entry rules, it will always suck. I hate that a division loser got in, and I had already posted that had it been Michigan.

But given the lack of firm rules, osu took advantage of that. Well, they didn’t do anything, the committee backed themselves into the corner to take osu. Which they opened a few times before for the SEC.
 
Russell Jaslow said:
The problem is, Ohio State gained an advantage by getting blown out by Michigan and thus not having to play an extra game.

I know, win the game, and USC would be in. And I'm okay with that retort. It just seems a bit odd that OSU gained by losing.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure this is true.

First, I don't know how you gain by having your fate removed from your own hands.

Second, it really depended more upon who lost (and their record).

For instance, had USC won and TCU, Georgia, or Michigan lost (or maybe all of them lost), I don't think OSU is in. OSU got in because USC lost more than once this season, and as it happens, twice to the same team. The committee was comparing a two loss team with a one loss team, and the one loss team's only loss was to the #2 team in the country. OSU's "advantage" was gained through their season long play.
 
ticapnews said:
Or we could have the old bowl system. That would be dandy.

Fiesta Bowl: #11 Kansas State vs #4 Ohio State (1 ET, NBC)
Rose Bowl: #2 Michigan vs #7 Utah (4:30 ET, NBC)
Orange Bowl: #3 TCU vs #10 Clemson (8 ET, NBC)
Sugar Bowl: #1 Georgia vs #9 Penn State (8:30 ET, ABC)
All games Monday, January 2nd (to avoid NFL playoffs)
Click to expand...

Sounds good to me
 
A lot of murmuring about Jason Garrett becoming Stanford's coach. Don't really know enough about him to judge that coach, but seems like it could work.
 
state of hockey said:
They’re both bad. But still fun.
Click to expand...

This was what these games were like in my formative years. It felt like they always went into those games 1-8, and it was a candidate for my dream football score of 4-4.

Then Navy got competent for a while, and it wasn't fun.

The academies suck unless we're in a terrible war, so I am glad they are back to laughable. If they ever need a lift the loser can schedule the Ivy champion and win by 73.
 
That said, I liked it when both had simple uniforms befitting the history of the game. These new ones are absolutely hideous.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top